From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user,gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Doc organization (Re: Around again, and docs lead role) Date: 10 May 2003 12:32:21 +0100 Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <3E92E1B4002B0632@pop3.tiscalinet.es> <3EAFE4EC000D9733@pop1.tiscalinet.es> <87d6its93b.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <87isskq2mi.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1052568481 18095 80.91.224.249 (10 May 2003 12:08:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 12:08:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 10 14:08:00 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19ET8x-0004hR-00 for ; Sat, 10 May 2003 14:07:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ET9a-0006LX-02 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:08:38 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ET8p-00069s-00 for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:07:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ET7k-0005qz-00 for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:06:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.21] helo=s1.uklinux.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ET5G-0004vY-00; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:04:10 -0400 Original-Received: from laruns.ossau.uklinux.net (bts-0988.dialup.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.51.220]) by s1.uklinux.net (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4AC3xw15733; Sat, 10 May 2003 13:03:59 +0100 Original-Received: from laruns.ossau.uklinux.net.ossau.uklinux.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])ESMTP id D280BDC4D4; Sat, 10 May 2003 12:32:23 +0100 (BST) Original-To: Rob Browning In-Reply-To: <87isskq2mi.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> Original-Lines: 52 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Original-cc: guile-user@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:1933 gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2323 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:1933 >>>>> "Rob" == Rob Browning writes: Rob> Neil Jerram writes: >> To avoid this happening, I suggest that we could solve this >> problem by a mechanism that links Scheme code into a library or >> executable at build time. This could be something like unexec >> (in which case the source would already have been read and >> stored in tree code), or it could be a linker tool that just >> dumps plain source code into the binary - as though it was a >> big const char[], but more convenient to use at build time. Rob> That could be interesting. To some extent how we decide to Rob> handle compilation will factor in here. Yes. Rob> If you thought large static scm fragments, were likely to be Rob> common, I guess one thing that might make hacking easier Rob> would be an easy way to do something equivalent to #include Rob> , i.e. a way you could hack the scheme part as a Rob> scheme file, but then have the code end up incorporated in Rob> and evaled by the .so file. Of course I guess anyone could Rob> hack something like that up if they needed to with a makefile Rob> and appropriate use of "cat"... #include would be very nice, but we'll probably need something more dynamic as well. I don't see what you mean by cat though. Rob> Actually, I've been playing around with code that would make something Rob> like this possible (as a dumb example): Rob> (define (double x) Rob> (c-syntax Rob> (if ("SCM_INUMP" x) Rob> (return (* x x)) Rob> (return ("scm_apply" ("scm_lookup" "+") x x))))) I don't see how this helps - please explain. Rob> Sure, but I was wondering what else might be needed. Of course I'm Rob> not sure I have a clear idea of what kind of things might be Rob> omitted... I don't have a very clear idea myself yet. The main category in my mind so far is almost all primitives - e.g. scm_catch, scm_setgid, scm_set_object_properties_x - some exceptions being those concerned with dissecting and constructing data - e.g. scm_cons, scm_list_p, SCM_CAR, scm_vector. Regards, Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user